Does it matter what section they use to classify it? The fact is that they ban it. And many more. When important topics are debated, even the most respectfully formulated argument can be deeply hurtful to the side that is on the opposing end. For example, if you respectfully tell a religious person that their religion is bunk and they are wasting their time on a bunch of fairy tales - it could be deeply hurtful. Should we ban all atheists from social media?
Banning such discussion very soon precludes any disagreement with increasingly narrow set of orthodox doctrines. Of course, Twitter has fully legal right to do exactly that - but what's the use of such platform? And if all major platforms do that - what happens to the society where important questions can not be publicly discussed?
Do you have a citation for that? All of the reports which I saw were that specific people harassing specific users were flagged as violating the abusiveness clause of the terms of service. Nobody said anything about hate speech or even non-targeted rude remarks before the usual right-wing grievance machine started whining about a private company enforcing its contractual terms.
rhcom2|7 years ago
smsm42|7 years ago
Banning such discussion very soon precludes any disagreement with increasingly narrow set of orthodox doctrines. Of course, Twitter has fully legal right to do exactly that - but what's the use of such platform? And if all major platforms do that - what happens to the society where important questions can not be publicly discussed?
acdha|7 years ago